The way I interpret the 840 vs 940 is not that the 940 is "punchier" but the 940 has a slightly sharper leading edge and a slightly better transient. Which would lead to the 840 having more bloom than the 940. Looking at the charts it's fairly close. Factor in the 840's mid bass hump and impact would add to the 840 having a bass tilt. Neither one have the flagship square wave performance and when others start comparing the 940 to the HD800 the Shure comes up short. Plus the bass "hole" is evident.

Factor in the 840's mid bass hump and impact would add to the 840 having a bass tilt. Neither one have the flagship square wave performance and when others start comparing the 940 to the HD800 the Shure comes up short. Plus the bass "hole" is evident.

Yeah, now the "bass hole" is obvious, will try to eq later to match the hd800 graph. Regarding the square response, the se530 , trounce the hd800

I've always thought the LDC2.1 (I haven't yet listened to the LCD2.2) had the best bass response I've heard in any headphone. Ironically enough, I've had the SE530 (and SE535) and had felt the bass has a bit of bloom to it.

The bloom of the shure se530 is probably because of the highly rolled off highs

I don't disagree with that premise, however, the LCD2.1 has a quite similar FR and it's highs are also rolled. From my experience, even though I never had the SE530 and LCD2.1 together, the bass was, to me, better controlled and better extended on the LCD2.1. I can't help thinking that even though the 50Hz Square wave graph is similar between the two that one being a full sized headphone (planar) and the other an IEM might account for my perception.

The ideal curve is not flat and smooth in the highs like that. Remember we have to account for flat response minus HRTF so a diffused field eq curve is more approximate in sounding natural and neutral to our ears. Plus combine a diffuse field eq with the fletcher munson curve then you get cans with accuracy at different volumes.

The ideal curve is not flat and smooth in the highs like that. Remember we have to account for flat response minus HRTF so a diffused field eq curve is more approximate in sounding natural and neutral to our ears. Plus combine a diffuse field eq with the fletcher munson curve then you get cans with accuracy at different volumes.

What I've noticed is there's almost no matching between hd800 & srh940 curve in the high freq zone, so I thought adopting something relatively flat between two curves wouldn't hurt. I must study later this story of "diffuse field eq", I must sleep . But you are welcome to provide short explanations.